In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:
Bob Hobden wrote:
"Nick Maclaren" wrote |

Some meterologists are extremely proud of those forecasts because,
in the past few years, they have started to be more reliable than
listening to the oldest inhabitant of the local pub. Others feel
that the difference in reliability is small.

When you think of the computing power they have at their disposal,
two new NEC's to replace their Cray system, then they bloody well
should be getting better.
http://www.metoffice.com/research/nw...cal/computers/

What? When a butterfly flaps its wing in the Amazon forest..?

Be kind to him. Elementary numerical analysis[*] isn't obvious to
the uninitiated layman :-)
[*] What are now often referred to as chaotic systems were referred
to as numerically unstable ones when they were studied before about
1980. The problem is the same - the approach differs. I am no
expert, but anyone insane enough to ask for a more detailed
explanation is welcome to do so :-)


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.